The decision emphasized the importance of upholding the provisions of the Delhi Public Gambling Act, 1955, in determining the release of seized funds and property during the course of investigation.

P.S.TEJI, J

1. Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions.

2. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for issuance of directions to quash the order dated 21st May, 2015 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi and the order dated 15th July, 2015 passed by the Revisional Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi and thereby issuance of direction for Investigating Officer/SHO of Police Station Paschim Vihar for releasing the funds of the petitioner seized during the course of investigation of FIR bearing no.255/2015 registered under Sections 3, 4 & 9 of the Delhi Public Gambling Act, 1956 at Police Station Paschim Vihar, on superdari.

3. The facts giving rise to the present petition are within the narrow compass and to the extent necessary, have been mentioned hereinafter. As per the version of the petitioner, the petitioner along with his other colleagues was running committees. For the purpose of collecting the instalments and bids to release the committee, the meetings were fixed on first or second day of each month. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that on the same line, on 1st April, 2015, a meeting was held for the collection of instalment and release of committee funds and this committee was fixed for a sum of Rs.3,00,000/-having fifteen members for a period of fifteen months. It was next contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that on the alleged day, when a meeting was going on, police officials from Police Station Paschim Vihar came there and enquired, when the members of the committee informed them about the filing of committee. However, the police officials gave this meeting a colour of their choice and planted a false story of gambling for their own self glorification and thus falsely implicated the petitioner. It is alleged that a sum of Rs.25,000/-and mobile phone of Carbon-Machone make were seized by the police during investigation. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the money seized i.e. Rs.25,000/-included an amount of Rs.20,000/-towards monthly instalment for the committee and remaining Rs.5,000/-for his personal usage.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner undertook to furnish indemnity bond/security bond for the funds proposed to be released in his favour in order to secure the case property as and when the need arose. However, the application for this purpose was dismissed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate on the ground that the same could be decided only after the final outcome of the case as the fate of the instruments of gambling would depend upon the conviction or the acquittal of the accused persons.

5. In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgment dated 10th September, 2009 passed by this Court in Crl.M.C. Nos.4485/2013 & 16055/2013 titled Manjit Singh v. State.

6. On the other hand, the State had taken a stand which was contrary to the version of the petitioner. As per the State, an information was received to the effect that in House No.A4/209A, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi, a few persons were gambling which involved money in which owner of the house was also involved. When police officials along with SHO raided the said house, they saw that certain persons were gambling with playing cards and some money was also kept on the floor. It was also contended that some persons were holding playing cards in their hands along with tokens which were red, green, blue and yellow in colour. The police made recovery of three packets of playing cards, Rs.2,37,000/-cash, seventeen mobile phones and 281 tokens.

7. Vide order dated 15th July, 2015, the learned Additional Sessions Judge held that cash of Rs.2,37,000/-is case property and that the same cannot be released to the petitioner at that stage. It was also held by learned ASJ that fourteen persons were apprehended and that it could not be believed that a co